The first few lines in the article by Pea and Maldonado (2006) reminded me that so many people do not think of their phones, tablets, or iPod touches as computers, despite that being exactly what they are. Pea and Maldonado (2006) refer to small hand-held networked computer devices as wireless interactive learning devices (WILD) and deem them as having greater potential over desktop or laptop computers in the classroom in regards to “equitable, personal, effective, and engaging learning” (p. 427) because they make previously unattainable activities possible.

Because I teach second grade, my students do not have portable devices they bring to school to use in the classroom (none of them have smartphones, but many of them have iPod touches). Therefore, as I was reading Pea and Maldonado’s article (specifically the eight features that make make mobile computers popular in learning environments), I thought about cell phones and smartphones at the secondary level. Despite not teaching at this level, I have heard so much from friends, family, and colleagues that do who struggle with mobile computers in the classroom due to their ability to distract students from focusing, listening, and learning. According to Sharples (2013), “personal ownership of technology is both motivating and disruptive” (p. 9). I was reading the eight reasons mobile computers are so popular (they’re readily available and portable, most kids already know how to use them, they’re quick and easy to use, and can be used in countless ways) and I thought about all the secondary teachers who have prohibitive rules about mobile computers in their classroom. And I get it…teaching is hard enough without having students stare at their laps reading a text from a friend, so I can understand the need for regulating the use of personal mobile technology. However, if your school does not have access to its own mobile computers, and your only options are the ones sitting in the laps of your students, you might not want to be prohibiting or ignoring them. According to Pea and Maldonado (2006), students are informally interacting with learning content already outside of school and their hope for the future is that “WILD technologies become ubiquitously woven in new ways into the fabric of tomorrow’s societal learning systems” (p. 438), which will require the “talented engagements of the educational, research, and technology industries to forge the visions and innovations in tools, environments, and instructional practices” (p. 438).

I’ve taken several classes about technology in the classroom, and like many of the articles I’ve read, so many of the ideas on how to integrate mobile computers into learning environments are geared toward the secondary level. Pea and Maldonado (2006) mentioned a few ideas that could apply to my classroom, like using mobile computers to create concept maps or flow charts or to support data aggregation across all students (similar to apps I’ve already used like Kahoot, Socrative, Plickers, etc.). One of my favorite quotes from these readings was from Sharples (2013) regarding whether or not educators should use mobile technologies that are already known to the learner or if they should adopt a new device or usage (to me this meant should you have your students use an app they all know and are comfortable with? Or should you introduce them to a new app/method?). According to Sharples (2013), the most effective approach is to be open to both options and working within them, but while simultaneously enlarging the scope of use. I think this really ties in to the informality so many teachers see regarding mobile technology, which deters them from using it in their classrooms. To me, Sharples is saying that it’s not only okay, but an effective approach, to use what your students already know, but educators should still seek to enlarge the scope of what students know. This seemed to tie in with one of Sharples’ critical success factors regarding integration: “successful mobile learning projects do not stand apart, but are integrated with the curriculum, the student experience or “real life”, or indeed any combination of the three” (Sharples, 2013, p. 8).

According to Warschauer and Matuchniak (2010), there is a new digital divide in today’s society and it lies

“in differential ability to use new media to critically evaluate information, analyze, and interpret data, attack complex problems, test innovative solutions, manage multifaceted projects, collaborate with others in knowledge production, and communicate effectively to diverse audiences—in essence, to carry out the kinds of expert thinking and complex communication that are at the heart of the new economy” (p. 213).

To summarize, I think that the informal aspects of learning with mobile technologies, along with how we can use mobile technology in the classroom create a challenge for educators. According to Sharples (2013), teachers need to set guidelines for appropriate use in the classroom and to provide tools for learning that integrate with commercial applications. It sounds so much easier than it is!

References

Pea, R. D., & Moldonado, H. (2006). WILD for learning: Interacting through new computing devices anytime, anywhere. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge University Handbook of the Learning Sciences (Chapter 25). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sharples, M. (2013). Mobile learning: research, practice and challenges. Distance Education in China, 3(5), 5-11.​

Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179-225.